Message to Mitt: You’re missing your own point.

Monday, January 23, 2012

“Mitt, Mitt, Mitt.” I’m shaking my head and sighing while I say that. From one dork to another, let me tell you that you don’t get it.

Later tonight you’re going to participate in another debate with Newt, this one being a prelude to the Florida primary. Newt plays well to the audience, in the studio and on their couches across America. The thing is, he’s a jerk, an ethically challenged jerk at that, who’s only claim to fame is that he’s perhaps the best possible example of what’s wrong with politicians in general and Washington in particular.

Again and again, we keep electing politicians President, and again and again we’re disappointed with their performance. It’s no wonder. (See “Voter Insanity” for elaboration of this last point.) What we need in charge of our government is a “Manager,” with a capital M and in quotes, a senior executive with demonstrated management capabilities who has achieved, in multiple private and public sector venues, success at a very high level. ..Know anyone like that?

That’s right, Mitt. It’s you I’m talking about. While Newt has been busy huffing and puffing and threatening to blow your house down, you’ve been talking about all the jobs you’ve created at Bain. Admirable, if not particularly effective. Personally, I’m tired of hearing about Bain. I’m all Bained out.

Trust me, with the exception of a few hundred thousand nut balls who actually think more bluster is what we need in Washington, even Republic voters will realize sooner than later what a bozo Newt really is. He’ll self-destruct because that’s what people do who have giant egos, ethical issues and no real idea what they’re doing. Intellectually, he’s a poser doing his best to mesmerize voters by playing on their anxieties and anger. Abraham Lincoln, a notable Republican if there ever was one, said something once about not being able to fool all of the people all of the time that I think applies. You can and you have to do better, otherwise I’m not even voting for you.

Here’s the deal and how you’re missing the point. It’s not about the jobs you created at Bain. It’s about the management skills you demonstrated there, as Governor of Massachusetts and when you turned the Olympics around. You’re a manager Mitt, an extremely effective one, and that, Mitt, is exactly what we need running our government.

Many years ago when I was a little kid, I was working in my father’s shop in our basement filing some metal part for some who-knows-what that I was making. It was a time in my life before common sense and safety glasses. Anyway, I got a tiny fleck of metal in my eye and my mother made an appointment for me with a ophthalmologist to have it removed. On the way there in the car she told me something that stuck. She told me that I should be prepared, that the doctor didn’t have much of a bedside manor. That he was pretty much all business and might not seem particularly friendly, but that he really knew is stuff and I should trust him. My mother was smart. ..She was also a Republican, by the way, of the Eisenhower variety – another notable person with demonstrated management skills. I, myself, am an Independent who thinks President Obama is a nice guy, with a good bedside manner, but not what we need in the White House.

Mitt, your bedside manner needs work, but the American people need and deserve a Manager of your demonstrated capabilities. Newt couldn’t manage his way out of a paper bag. The only management position he’s ever had was Speaker of the House, and we know how that turned out.

Talk about the jobs you’ve created, sure, but it’s not just about Bain. And don’t be so afraid of how you sometimes supported this then, and something else later. Think about it. Talk about it. That’s what great managers do. It’s about your personal opinions, it’s about problem solving, and that’s obviously something you do really really well. ..As for the other guy, Newt couldn’t solve a serious problem if it bit him on his ass.


11 responses to “Message to Mitt: You’re missing your own point.

  1. Message to WF: You’re missing your own point.
    “WF, WF, WF.” I’m shaking my head and sighing while I say that. From one dork to another, let me tell you that you don’t get it. Your logic fails in that you assume Mitt will perform the magic for the country that he did for himself with Bain and the Olympics. You are convinced that Newt is crooked and can’t manage macro-economics.

    Mr. BO has been in Washington three years and still has not learned how to be President. It appears that he never will because it is a job and he has never had the experience. He has no managerial or economic skills and as Mitt says, in truth, “Obama is over his head.”

    If Mitt becomes wins, he will have to learn first how to be President to be effective. Mr. Newt has spent enough time in Washington that he knows his way around and will be able to get to work immediately. We don’t need someone to OJT in the White House. We need a leader and in spite of his short comings, Newt is much better prepared in my humble opinion. We both agree that politicians are not to be trusted but then we must choose from the ones running. We both probably agree that regardless of who wins in November, they are not to be trusted completely. Newt or Mitt but we surely can not afford another four years of BO. I am to old to learn Chinese and I refuse to wear a turban or buy a camel. What I’m saying is we must have anyone but Obama. ABO!!

  2. Well. First of all, thank you for the comment. Second, we agree that Mr. Obama is clueless but.. and it’s a big “BUT,” with one “t” of course. The “but” is that even I am voting for President Obama if Newt gets the nomination.

    Why? (1) Because he’s severely ethically challenged. I’m no doctor, but I believe his ethics are on life support. (2) He’s an insufferable blowhard. President Obama talks too much, but at least he’s tolerable and does a fair Al Green. (3) By far and away, you’re right about the on-the-job-training issue, but wrong about the job, about the definition of the position we’re filling in November.

    Yeah, Newt knows Washington. That’s not an advantage, that’s his problem. Mitt knows management, and that’s why I like him. Ethical considerations aside, given a choice between electing a President who needs OJT in management — that would be Newt — versus one who has already proven to be a superior financial and administrative manager who needs OJT training in the nuances of Washington politics, pick the later, hands down. It’s the former choice that keeps disappointing us, that has failed time and time again to solve our fiscal problems and implement intelligent social programs.

    How ’bout them apples?


  3. Mitt is hitting Newt as hard as he can–and in this controlled environment, the blows are landing. fldebate

    • Hi. I’m not so sure Republican voters are getting the point. Somehow, Mitt needs to leverage the media Newt’s always complaining about.

      Newt’s business at Freddie Mac was obviously all about influence peddling. It’s nonsense to think otherwise. He’s a lobbyist, unregistered, but a lobbyist nonetheless. The real question, and Newt’s Achilles’ heel in all this, is did he actually break the law by not registering as a lobbyist? It’s a federal law, but the Obama administration won’t touch it, won’t dare go after Newt. Bad politics. That leaves the media.

      The media can and should pursue the question of legality. That will keep the issue in the headlines and Newt on the defensive, leaving Romney free to focus on the positive aspects of his candidacy.

      Thanks for stopping by.


  4. You go, WF! You are absolutely right on sooooo many levels! Let’s face it – Newt’s pretty much a legend in his own mind (not mine . . . a least, not for the right reason); a blowhard in a three piece suit. In bed with Freddie Mac and Fanny Mae. Extremely questionable moral values (is wife #3 getting nervous every time she visits her doc?). But I guess that was an unfair statement as it seems just about everybody in Washington has questionable moral values to one degree or another. However, I agree with your points about Mitt. Maybe it’s time to elect someone who actually knows how to run things, instead of just another politician.

  5. Hey, Mimzy. All this political stuff is getting hard to watch. It’s bad reality TV. I’m beginning to feel embarrassed, but I’m not sure for who? The candidates? The country? Me, for being sucked into all this? I RedBoxed “Ides of March” last weekend, the George Clooney, Ryan Gosling, et al political thriller. Compared to the real thing, it seemed almost lame.

    Did you notice the difference between last night’s debate and the one before it in South Carolina? Brian Williams asked the audience to stay out of it which helped Romney and took most of the wind out of Gingrich’s sails without cheering to make his applause lines seem meaningful. (How dumb do they think we are? “Gee, honey, they’re all clapping. I guess we should vote for him. What do you think? ..Pass the Cheetos, would you? Yeah, thanks, and another beer would be nice. ..’Open marriage,’ my ass. Go, Newt! ..Your mother didn’t hear that, did she, Junior?”) Politics has always been about theater, from the very beginning, but not like this. Virtually zero relevant substance.

    I’m beginning to think my “Next Contestant Party” which I playfully suggested in the “The New Politics of ‘I blame me.'” (11/25/11) may actually make sense. ..Are you considering running as a third party candidate? Let me know.


  6. WF, just face it!! You’re a Democrat at heart!!! Thats nothing to be ashamed of but it is very dangerous at this point in time. You know Newt will never get the nomination but if he does, he will never beat BO. Mitt will win the GOP nomination but I don’t think he can beat BO. Unlike you, I will do everything in my power to see that BO is not reelected in November, even if Ron Paul wins the nomination. I spent to many years in the military to let our freedoms be taken by a grandiose and spineless worm who seeks to replace democracy with socialism because he thinks he knows what is best for Ameicans. I will fight it to my death if needs be.

    How ’bout them apples!!!

  7. “Grandiose and spineless worm”? I gather you’re not a big fan of our President. Me neither.

    I don’t know about the grandiose and spineless part. I think the President is a good, intelligent man who is just in way over his head, without the relevant experience and expertise to solve our government’s problems. As I’ve said in other posts, the last thing we need to elect is one more professional politician. Of the people running, including President Obama, Mitt Romney is undoubtedly the closest to being the Manger-President I want in office.

    More to the point, the art and science of politics in our era has become useless for the purposes of effective government.

    Sure, we voted for these people, for our President and Congress, and that’s on us to a significant extent, but then ours is a relatively passive, reactionary process through which we choose from among candidates who are no longer capable of or interested in problem resolution.

    Far be it from me to complain without offering specific solutions. Here’s a short list of what I would do. The first is legislative. The second is Constitutional. The third is about voter activism.

    The first thing we need to do is to remove money from the election process. The legitimization of Super PACS has monetized elections to an extent not even I thought possible. The obvious problem is that the very people who we rely upon to fix this process are the ones who have benefited from the current system and have the most to lose from its demise.

    The second thing we need to do is increase House terms from 2 to 4 or even 6 years so our representatives aren’t forever running for office and, in the process, impose reasonable term limits. I really don’t like the idea of a “career politician.” It’s a radical thing, I know, to tamper with the Constitution, but times have changed since the Framers wrote it. It’s high time to make some mid-course corrections in this very limited, very specific respect.

    (Between you and me, I’d eliminate the Senate. I realize why our Framers did what they had to do, why England has a House of Lords, but that was literally centuries ago. The year is 2012. People have rights, not states. and our Congress has one level of decision making too many. I’d also increase the size of Congressional Districts, which modern technology allows us to do without any significant loss of representation, to cut the number of Representatives in half to further facilitate decision-making.)

    And third, something we, the people can do, all by ourselves, every election. See my piece entitled “The New Politics of ‘I blame me.'” posted 11/25/11 in which i recommended that, with rare exceptions, we always vote for the challenger, for the “Next Contestant” for as long as we are dissatisfied with our government. Let our elected officials, the President included, know that we hold them all accountable, all of them, for the obstructionism, for the lack of imagination and intelligence, for the lack of progress we observe in their institution (Congress) as a whole. Let no Congressman/woman, Senator or President sit on the sidelines, use meaningless rhetoric, make empty promises or blame his colleagues for the failure of government. From my perspective as a voter, I hold them all responsible.

    Always a pleasure, JoeCar.


    • OB is a smart man but he is grandiose because he projects in attitude and action (very little) that he knows what is best for Ameica when he is neck-deep in organized labor’s pocket and can not make a decision. He wants Congress to do the work to his satisfaction and he simply sign it into law. He does not want to get in the trenches with Congress and get his hans dirty. He is a Pacifist in that he soft-shoes encounters with enemies and potential threats. Syria, Lybia, Egypt, and now Iran. His weak presentation to the Jihadist, Muslims and eventually the Chinese will only encourage furture conflict and aggression. Sure, he gave the order to for the mission that killed Bin Laden but that was easy to do with the level of intelligence he was surely afforded. It took no backbone to give that order. He sluffed off Lybia to NATO and the French Command. THE FRENCH????? I do not want any more American blood shed anywhere but if it must be shed, I’d rather it be in another country and not within our borders like the catastrophe of 9/11.

      I basically agree with you in what you said here and I would rather have another candidate to look at for 2012 but we don’t. So, I guess you will have to go to your chuech and me to mine and we both pray, God Bless America!!!!!!!

  8. Hi. I understand that Republican leaders in the House and Senate, both the current and the previous generation (Bob Dole, for example) are panic stricken that Newt just might get nominated and are doing their best to stop that from happening. Their efforts in advance of the Florida primary, together with Mitt’s greatly improved performance in last night’s debate, may be enough to at least slow Newt’s momentum if not result in an Romney victory next Tuesday. We’ll see.

    It’s one of those time when I just don’t get it. Newt Gingrich lost his position as Speaker having been disciplined by the House for ethics violations, as if the House has any right to throw that stone, and is then paid $1.6+ million by the senior lobbyist of Freddie Mac for unspecified services in the performance of which Newt broke federal law for having failed to register as a lobbyist. The guy’s got conflicts of interest out his tush. Nobody in government, either party, liked working with him or respects him and, as I’ve argued elsewhere, there’s no reason to believe he can manage his way out of a paper bag, let alone the government of the United States. What on earth makes him a viable candidate? Why is he even up on that stage, let alone winning primaries?


  9. All I can say is to repeat, Message to WF: You’re missing your own point.
    “WF, WF, WF.” I’m shaking my head and sighing while I say that. From one dork to another, let me tell you that you don’t get it. Your logic fails in that you assume Mitt will perform the magic for the country that he did for himself with Bain and the Olympics.

    Would love to keep this up but I’m moving and must make that a priority for now. Sorry for the delayed response. We both know Duh Bro’s gotta go, fo’ sho,’ fo’ sho.’ VOTE ABO.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s